Skip to comments.
Cardinal Newman Society Campaign Against Offensive “Monologues” Achieves Results
Life Site News ^
| 2/1/06
| Gudrun Schultz
Posted on 02/01/2006 11:55:54 AM PST by wagglebee
MANASSAS, VIRGINIA, United States, February 1, 2006 (LifeSiteNews.com) Five Catholic universities have stated they will not permit the Vagina Monologues to be presented on campus, and four more say the play wont appear, after a campaign by the Cardinal Newman Society (CNS) to stop performances of the offensive production on Catholic campuses.
The Monologues is an obscene, sometimes pornographic celebration of womens sexuality that focuses on lesbian sexual experiences and masturbation. The play encourages the use of vulgar and explicit sexual language, and glorifies the lesbian seduction of a young girl.
The CNS contacted 29 Catholic colleges this year to encourage the cancellation of planned performances in February and March 2006. The Societys campaign has seen increasing success, with declining numbers of annual performances at Catholic colleges and universities. Last year, the play was performed at 27 Catholic schools, down from 29 in 2004 and 32 in 2003.
V-Day, an organization started by the plays author, radical feminist Eve Ensler, to promote the Monologues, has acknowledged the success of the CNSs efforts by posting a rebuttal on their website.
Universities that will not allow performances on campus include the Catholic University of America, Marquette University, New York Medical College, Providence College and Seton Hall University.
Assumption College, Carlow University, Sacred Heart University and Saint Xavier University have said the play will not appear, but have not officially banned the performance.
TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: catholic; catholiccolleges; homosexualagenda; homosexuals; moralabsolutes; vaginamonologues; vmonologues
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40 last
To: John O; GOP_Party_Animal; Coleus
Though it's hard to tell mosttimes, MU has always been a tad to the right of the other Jesuit schools.
21
posted on
02/01/2006 1:08:53 PM PST
by
Incorrigible
(If I lead, follow me; If I pause, push me; If I retreat, kill me.)
Comment #22 Removed by Moderator
Comment #23 Removed by Moderator
To: illinoissmith
This is a disservice to Mill, who recognized that there are greater things in human life than bumps, scratches, and base pleasure rushes.
Not really. Just because people have used Mill to give themselves a philosophical backing to indulge their own basest desires, doesn't necessarily reflect badly on the man himself. I suspect he'd be rather horrified to find out the kind of activities that are being endorsed using his philosophy.
24
posted on
02/01/2006 1:17:42 PM PST
by
Antoninus
(The only reason you're alive today is because your parents were pro-life.)
To: DonalWheresMaTrousers
Not especially.
Thanks. You confirmed my suspicions.
Isn't semester break over by now?
25
posted on
02/01/2006 1:19:45 PM PST
by
Antoninus
(The only reason you're alive today is because your parents were pro-life.)
To: DonalWheresMaTrousers
It is simply a play about an aspect of life.
Glad you're such a discerning person. I guess a play about taking a dump would be fine with you too. After all, that's a much more common aspect of life.
Death to relativism!
26
posted on
02/01/2006 1:21:33 PM PST
by
Antoninus
(The only reason you're alive today is because your parents were pro-life.)
To: DonalWheresMaTrousers
"The play doesnt suggest that sex is the be all and end all of humanity. It does however point out that it is an important part of human existence. It chooses to focus on that part of existence, just as other plays focus on other parts of existence."
This is factually incorrect. The play elevates sex to a level beyond respect for things like ability of minors to consent, and beyond things like the importance of context to give an act meaning and purpose, etc. The material of the play is evidence for the role it suggests sex should have in life. That suggested role is as end-unto-itself goal, disconnected from other parts of reality, and higher to them.
Further reason why I say what I say about this play, is that this play fits in seamlessly with a social pattern I have observed in many other places and forms. This social pattern is the nihilistic hedonist worldview very prevalent in the post-Christian West, which is causing tremendous misery and intellectual brokenness and backwardness in its hapless adherents.
"Again, I dont think the play attempts to hurt people. It is simply a play about an aspect of life."
There are some harms in life that are a bit more subtle than, though just as damaging as, things like getting hit over the head with a frying pan. I have tried to lay out my take on some of these, above. Further discussion and I will just do more in the same vein. If you can't fathom this, I doubt we can do much more than talk past each other.
To: John O
St Louis University allowed it last year. I wrote Fr Biondi a letter that I no longer would donate $$$ to a university that promotes such trash. I have kept my pledge. I'll send $$$ to the Newman Society.
28
posted on
02/01/2006 1:32:34 PM PST
by
berkley
Comment #29 Removed by Moderator
To: Incorrigible; John O
One of my brothers donates yearly to Marquette... That is, until this year with the "Gold" fiasco among other things. I suggested he switch his donation to the CNS and tell MU why he is doing that.
To: GOP_Party_Animal
I got a call from them just yesterday. A very nice young lady called and asked for my donation. I asked if they had changed the name back to Warriors yet. She said no but it was still quite a controversy. I told her that it would continue to be one and that they should call me back when they change the name.
31
posted on
02/01/2006 1:45:23 PM PST
by
John O
(God Save America (Please))
To: Antoninus
"Not really. Just because people have used Mill to give themselves a philosophical backing to indulge their own basest desires, doesn't necessarily reflect badly on the man himself. I suspect he'd be rather horrified to find out the kind of activities that are being endorsed using his philosophy."
I misspoke, and I apologize for doing so. I should have said, not that you do a disservice to Mill, but that I believe you misrepresent some of the details of his particular variety of Utilitarianism.
I suspect you are thinking of the philosophy Bentham, and of other Utilitarians in his vein, not of Mill.
They differ is some significant ways. Mill's system would have put VM-esque trash on the level of a pig's desires, and given them very low weight in his calculus. Bentham was dealing with, essentially, the physical intensity of the pleasure of pain, to give weight to various pleasure of pain, and so his system is very easily accommodating for things like VM. Most famous Utilitarians today are of Bentham's vein (Singer, for one).
You may not believe that Mill's system was a justifiable form of Utilitarianism, given the premises of Utilitarianism, but it is his system, so it is what he says it is. And what he says it is is a system where base pleasures get few points and higher pleasures get more points, without central regard to the physical intensity of those pleasures. Base and higher defined to mean, essentially, what an educated, civilized man like himself thinks they mean (his standard for higher vs. base is, which would an educated man, with knowledge of the full range of possible pleasures, prefer). Thus the famous Socrates quote.
To: illinoissmith
BTW, Bentham preceded Mill (IIRC, he was a friend of Mill's father), so I don't think it could be said that the fruits of Bentham's philosophy (such as VM) are, even indirectly, the fruits of Mill's.
To: DonalWheresMaTrousers
Again, I dont think the play attempts to hurt people. It is simply a play about an aspect of life. Aspects of life are anectdotal -the fact that things happen or are evident and or the frequency that things happen or are evident are inconsequential determinants in regards to morality. As example: liberals wish to continue aborting innocents -this too is an aspect of life -YET it is murder and is quite offensive.
It should be as objectively obvious to you as it is to me that that your apsect of life statement is morally meaningless...
34
posted on
02/01/2006 2:09:22 PM PST
by
DBeers
(†)
To: John O
...and that they should call me back when they change the name.LOL - Nice and simple. I told the girl (who was living in McCormick!) that I couldn't trust the administration and the BOD with my money. I think it went over her head.
To: GOP_Party_Animal; John O
We all must have talked to the same girl. Said she was a freshman living at McCormick and that it was her first day calling. She seemed a little too polished for that to be true though.
I have different reasons for not donating all these years mostly related to Dean Kipp.
36
posted on
02/01/2006 2:26:28 PM PST
by
Incorrigible
(If I lead, follow me; If I pause, push me; If I retreat, kill me.)
To: illinoissmith
Before rhe was removed by the moderater, DonalWheresMaTrousers wrote,
"Nobody gets hurt by a performance, therefore it isnt, in my opinion, immoral." I agree with yuour response. If a person means, "There were no cuts, abrasions, concussions, or gunshot wounds, and nobody was hospitalized by the end of the play," then you can say "nobody gets hurt." But, since we are human beings and not mountain bonobos, we can be damaged in more ways than physically. We have emotional, intellectual,and spiritual faculties that can be weakened, warped, injured, or killed.
37
posted on
02/01/2006 2:31:23 PM PST
by
Mrs. Don-o
(In defense of sex. No compromise.)
To: Incorrigible; John O
Here's a post from my favorite Marquette blog (gop3.com). Could the poster be our gal?
Allison Herre Says:
You are completely correct about the alums feeling alienated [re: Warriors]
i cannot count the number of times that i have been turned down for a donation for that very reason
its why i have to stay on the phone for an average of 30 mins longer a night than usual
To: Antoninus
39
posted on
02/01/2006 8:11:59 PM PST
by
metmom
(Welfare was never meant to be a career choice.)
To: Mrs. Don-o
"There were no cuts, abrasions, concussions, or gunshot wounds, and nobody was hospitalized by the end of the play," then you can say "nobody gets hurt." But, since we are human beings and not mountain bonobos, we can be damaged in more ways than physically. We have emotional, intellectual,and spiritual faculties that can be weakened, warped, injured, or killed."This is something I have understood since I was college age. Why is it so difficult for people to understand?
40
posted on
02/01/2006 9:50:20 PM PST
by
TAdams8591
(The first amendment does NOT protect vulgar and obscene speech.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson